Greens promise to force government to spend 1% of budget on environment if they hold balance of power
The Greens have promised to push the government to boost environment spending to $7.8bn – 1% of the federal budget – next financial year if they hold the balance of power after the election.
The minor party made the pledge as Labor faced calls to explain its nature policy after Anthony Albanese promised he would establish a federal environment protection agency (EPA) if re-elected. The prime minister said it would not be the 'same model' as one his government abandoned in this term of parliament after a backlash from Western Australia, but released no details.
The Greens leader, Adam Bandt, said Labor had broken a promise to protect the environment and Peter Dutton 'doesn't even pretend to care'. Bandt said his party's position was in line with expert calls for a large increase in spending on nature protection to prevent species going extinct and help halt a documented decline in environmental health across the country.
The Greens plan included $7.8bn funding in 2025-26 and an additional $17bn over the following three years. If delivered, the commitment would at least double government spending on nature, according to analysis by the Parliamentary Library.
The party said the commitments should be paid for by increasing taxes on 'big corporations and billionaires' – similarly to its other major platforms, such as adding dental to Medicare.
Sign up for the Afternoon Update: Election 2025 email newsletter
Bandt said 'far more public money is spent subsidising [nature] destruction than protection' and the Greens were 'the only party with a comprehensive plan to address the biodiversity crisis'.
'In a minority parliament, the Greens will keep Peter Dutton out and get Labor to act to protect and restore our precious natural environment,' he said.
Australia has more than 2,200 native species and ecosystems listed as threatened with extinction. Scientists and conservationists have described it as a world leader in mammal extinction, and a global deforestation hotspot.
Labor promised to revamp the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act – which has been widely criticised as failing business and the environment – and create an EPA in this term, but neither commitment was delivered.
Last week it was accused of weakening nature laws after it joined with the Coalition to amend the EPBC Act to protect salmon farming in Tasmania's Macquarie Harbour. The amendment was welcomed by the salmon industry, unions and the Tasmanian Liberal state government.
Sign up to Afternoon Update: Election 2025
Our Australian afternoon update breaks down the key election campaign stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters
after newsletter promotion
Albanese this week said a returned Labor government would consult the states and industry and conservation groups on new laws and a different EPA model. He said the final legislation would offer 'certainty for industry … but also provides for sustainability'.
The director of the Biodiversity Council, James Trezise, said the prime minister had not included any detail 'beyond a loose commitment to further consultation'. He said the point of an independent EPA was 'to deal with the influence of vested interests in decision making', but that this seemed a 'moot point' as vested interests 'appear to have the ear of the PM, whether it's around salmon farming in Tasmania or the design of a new environmental regulator'.
Trezise said Labor should again back the recommendations of a review of the EPBC Act led by the former competition and consumer watchdog Graeme Samuel, particularly his call for the establishment of national environmental standards against which development proposals could be measured.
Trezise said while Labor was yet to provide detail of what it would do, the Coalition had 'so far presented no clear plan for the law reform or the environment, beyond slashing the public service in Canberra'.
The Greens environmental policy wishlist includes reforming nature laws, banning native logging, spending $20bn on biodiversity restoration over the next decade and dedicating $5bn over four years to a new 'protected areas fund'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
4 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
Humza Yousaf slammed after ‘inept & ill-informed' social media posts over Israel-Iran war
Former First Minister Yousaf has been condemned as "inept and ill-informed" Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Humza Yousaf has been condemned as "inept and ill-informed" after he dismissed mounting concerns about Iran's nuclear ambitions. The former First Minister cast doubt on Sir Keir Starmer's warning that Iran's nuclear programme poses "a grave threat to global security". Sign up for the Politics newsletter Sign up 5 Former First Minister of Scotland Humza Yousaf addresses the crowd at national demonstration for Palestine, in London, in June Credit: EPA 5 Yousaf retweeted former Swedish prime minister Carl Bildt 5 Writing on X, Yousaf criticised Mr Starmer 5 Scottish Conservative Deputy Leader Rachael Hamilton criticised Yusaf The Prime Minister said Iran "can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon" as he called on the country's leaders to return to negotiations after the US launched strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. Writing on X, Yousaf said this was "an awful statement from the PM, which ignores our collective responsibility to uphold international law". Yousaf added: "Supporting illegal military action in Iran, and gas-lighting us about an imminent nuclear threat, is hauntingly reminiscent of the lies told in the run up to the Iraq war." Gas-lighting is a common shorthand for psychologically manipulating someone into doubting their own sanity or perception of reality. Yousaf also retweeted former Swedish prime minister Carl Bildt's claim that US intelligence assessments have been "politicised" and "are now evidently doctored on orders from the White House". The SNP MSP said: "I am old enough to remember what happened the last time we went to war on the basis of a "sexed up dossier" based on dodgy intelligence." Scottish Conservative Deputy Leader Rachael Hamilton said Yousaf "is doing no one any favours with his interventions on matters totally outwith the SNP government's remit". She said: "His own mercifully brief stint as First Minister was notable for a string of embarrassing self-inflicted disasters. 'Rather than producing inept and ill-informed opinions on international affairs, he should be working for his constituents who are struggling as a result of the failed policies he presided over.' Patrick Harvie, the Green MSP who is stepping down as party leader after 17 years in the role, also condemned the Prime Minister's remarks as "deplorable but all too predictable" on X. Trump's shock Iran strikes take us to bring of global conflict and will strengthen Axis of Evil alliance, experts warn He said: "Israel expanding its war, by attacking Iran when negotiations were imminent, was an outrage. The US is now escalating the conflict. Instead of being a voice for de-escalation, the UK is siding with the aggressors." The Prime Minister has also seen dissent from within his own party with Carol Mochan, the Scottish Labour MSP, also downplaying the Iranian nuclear threat on X. She said: "Once again the US President is dragging the world into a conflict it does not want with no backing from his Congress, no backing from the UN, and no clear evidence Iran was developing nuclear weapons. We have been here before, the UK must not blindly join America's wars."
Spectator
12 hours ago
- Spectator
How the ‘experts' got the grooming gang scandal so wrong
At this stage we can't predict what the government's new grooming gangs inquiry will say. But one thing is overwhelmingly likely: many will feel the heat. This includes police who stood back in the face of clear patterns of child sexual exploitation by young Pakistani men to avoid racial tension; social workers desperate not to offend their largely unassimilated Muslim clients; and councillors and politicians who said 'move on, nothing to see here' because of fears that Muslim voters might disown anyone who rocked the multicultural boat. With few exceptions, academics were some of the keenest to suppress discussion about groooming gang abusers' origins or ethnicity Even more interesting, however, is the light all this this has thrown on academia. With few exceptions, academics were some of the keenest to suppress discussion about the abusers' origins or ethnicity. Any reference to this, it was constantly said, risked spreading anti-Muslim racism, distracting attention from more important problems, 'racialising crime', ''othering' South Asian men' and characterising them as 'folk devils'. Paper after paper, seminar after seminar, was devoted to pushing variants on these themes. At first sight this looks odd. Police and social services at least had an incentive to make their jobs easier; so too politicians anxious about their voter base. But academics with no skin in this game? Why should they engage so hard in support of one side? Partly, one suspects, this may be due to the university environment. Ten years ago, a survey found 77 per cent of academics backed Labour, the Lib Dems or the Greens. Only 11 per cent were for the Tories. Today, the figure is possibly even more skewed. This doesn't just mean many academics are instinctively likely to support an approach based on racial identity politics. More seriously, all articles have to be peer reviewed. Peer reviewers within the humanities professoriate are only human. With the best will in the world, one suspects an article trying to minimise the relevance of ethnicity in favour of other factors is likely in practice to get an easier ride. But there is more to it than this. Few admit it, but there is something of a Faustian pact between universities and their state funders and providers of research grants, built on the fiction that in the humanities as much as in traditional sciences the state is investing in cutting-edge advances in knowledge. As a result, today's humanities academics, especially young ones with careers to make or lose, are pressured not only to produce more papers, but also to make their publications 'innovative', and in addition to strive for what is referred to as 'impact', a somewhat protean term that essentially means getting noticed by the great and the good. There are, put bluntly, big brownie points in getting called before a parliamentary committee or quango. The resulting incentive is baneful and perverse. Far from encouraging people to take a sober look at subjects like the sex grooming figures in Rochdale or Oldham and propose low-key, possibly unpalatable, measures to deal with them, the ambitious academic is much better advised to take a different, radical, line – indeed, the more radical the better. Much more attractive to university managers is the construction of new narratives based on theories of the impact of systemic racism or racist media, or on abstract notions of the 'othering' of particular groups. And there is the bonus that if you have radical ideas you're more likely to gain impact by being invited to address that parliamentary committee. This isn't necessarily to criticise the academics concerned. As often as not they have little choice but to promote their increasingly abstract and abtruse theories (many of which are intellectually dodgy owing to their tenuous link with empiricism and regular adoption of incomprehensible and conclusory jargon, but that's another story). But this phenomenon does have one very important result. Fifty years or so ago academics commanded a natural respect. If a professor pronounced on a social problem, with a few exceptions what they said was probably understandable to a layperson, soundly anchored in empiricism, and demonstrative of common sense. This was what made people take notice and take what they said seriously. Today, academics increasingly sound like just another part of the progressive commentariat, albeit with an annoying habit of unashamedly using increasingly esoteric words and, when challenged, insisting that it's not surprising we can't understand their high-powered science. That is their right. But there is also another side to this. If academics go down this road, they have little if any right to respect for their opinionated ramblings, and no particular claim to be listened to by government. We can only hope that the members of the grooming gang inquiry have the good sense to keep this in mind, and treat the earnest pronouncements of the new professoriate with the pointed scepticism they deserve.
The Herald Scotland
14 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Meet the 'radical' Greens challenging Harvie and Chapman
Tall and gregarious, the environmental campaigner has a disarming nature. Yet, speaking about his decision to stand in the party's selection contest against leading Green MSP Maggie Chapman — his former boss — Ingerson's voice crackles with passion. Indeed, he is just one of the party's foot soldiers to express dissatisfaction with the status quo in recent weeks. In Glasgow, a self-described 'unashamedly socialist' slate of candidates are looking to unseat long-time party boss Patrick Harvie. I spoke to Iris Duane, 22, earlier this week. Guy Ingerson is standing against Maggie Chapman. (Image: Supplied)'We are at a monumental crossroads,' the Glasgow University Vice President for Student Support notes. 'This election process is about having that conversation, seeing where we want to take the party and what we want to do in the future. 'All three of us,' Duane says, referring to co-conspirators Ellie Gomersall and Seonad Hoy, 'are working class and often feel quite discontented by the political class. 'Our message is very clear. We are unashamedly socialist. We are members of an eco-socialist party and we believe that that should be reflected.' Here too, the passion is evident. This perspective, that Scottish Greens leadership is out of touch with rank-and-file members, is shared by Hoy, a Hillhead councillor elected in a by-election upset last March. She remarks: 'A change of direction is needed. We've achieved a lot from our current MSP team. But now we need practical change that will impact peoples' daily lives. The mum and social housing advocate, who has been involved with the party since the independence referendum drew her into the political fray a decade ago, adds: 'I think we have a bit of an image problem. We're seen as quite middle-class and establishment. We need to be speaking to people." Scottish Greens councillor for Hillhead Seonad Hoy. (Image: Seonad Hoy) 'The Bute House Agreement was a major issue for the party and our external image,' Hoy concedes. 'I was in favour when we signed it, but there were a couple things which upset me, especially Humza Yousaf announcing a council tax freeze without consulting us. 'That should have been a red line.' The feeling that the Scottish Government has sold out local councils is shared by Ellie Gomersall, the third member of this radical triumvirate. Gomersall, formerly the president of student union NUS Scotland, will be challenging Harvie directly, asking Green members to select her number one on the party's list. She tells me: 'Everyday in Glasgow, I see the impact that cuts are having. There's a lack of ambition coming from the Scottish Parliament. I believe the Greens are pushing the parliament to go further, but we need more Green MSPs and fresh voices. 'Although we accomplished a lot, many members have lost trust in the party after signing the BHA due to issues like cuts and the council tax freeze.' Ellie Gomersall is also standing. (Image: Ellie Gomersall) Duane agrees. Asked what her priorities as an MSP would be, she pauses, before continuing. 'We often speak about wealth distribution and progressive taxation. But often what isn't raised is just how battered our local authorities have been in recent years. There are many, many local champions across many parties who are fighting for their areas. 'They've basically got two hands and two legs tied behind them. Councils need more money and whilst they're doing things like raising parking prices or raising council tax, it's simply not enough.' The Aberdeen-based Ingerson also brings up local government cuts, which have struck the Granite City hard in recent years with the closure of six libraries and a leisure centre in 2023. 'The North East has seen cuts to services and workers feel they aren't being listened to,' he remarks. 'We need someone on the top of the list who is from Mastrick (a neighborhood in Aberdeen) and has really good insight into the community.' Iris Duane stood for the Greens at the general election last year. (Image: Scottish Greens)The just transition is also a concern for the ex-oil and gas worker, who says: 'We desperately need a good plan. People need to know the timescale and need to know where the jobs are going. 'Right now, there is not a clear plan, we need to be led by the workers who are being affected.' Asked about the rise of Reform, Ingerson says the political malaise created by mainstream parties provides the Greens with a 'unique opportunity'. He tells me: 'We are well placed to pick up on disaffected voters but the key thing is we need to select the right people. 'Those attracted to Reform are people who are f***ed off' — I can quote that, he quips — 'with the way the dominant parties are treating them and we have a unique opportunity to offer them an alternative.' Maggie Chapman, who is currently involved in an internal bullying complaint lodged by Ingerson, has made similar comments. Read more: 'I'm just a wee bam from Grangemouth' How Gillian Mackay aims to lead Scottish Greens Greens activist to challenge Maggie Chapman for top spot on Holyrood list Green activist urges Harvie and Greer to make way for 'radical women' at election In her pitch to party members, she said: 'As your MSP, I have consistently demanded radical change, standing firm for our values and principles. I want to continue using my voice and experience to fight for the transformations the North East desperately needs and create a fairer, more peaceful world.' Indeed, Chapman has been a constant presence at events across the North East, protesting everything from shuttered libraries to job losses at Aberdeen University. Chatting to me a day later, Gomersall echoes Ingerson's language, noting: 'People are so tired of the political class, they are turning to Reform because they are scunnered with the status quo. 'When it comes to the issues working class people face, the Greens have the solutions, but that's not cutting through to people. So we need to change the narrative and priorities surrounding the party. On the ground, the reality is that our party is much more working class than people would expect. 'But that needs to be reflected in Holyrood.' Patrick Harvie (L) has been in Holyrood since 2003. (Image: PA) In a statement, Patrick Harvie praised the work of the party in the last several years, calling it the most successful period in their history. He told The Herald: 'In this session of Parliament we've delivered free bus travel for young people, wiping out school meal debt and expanding free school meals, saving people who rent their homes thousands of pounds through the rent freeze, investing in energy efficiency and increasing the Scottish Child Payment... and much of this paid for through progressive taxation that the Greens achieved, so people on high incomes pay their fair share. 'If I think back to the many long years when Greens could only campaign for change while achieving nothing, there can be zero doubt that we have been taking the right path in recent years. 'Greens are here to make a difference for people, not to be just a party of protest that gets nothing done.' One party source said Harvie remains popular among the Greens' 'significant passive membership' and that the race for the top spots on the Glasgow list could come down to Duane, Gomersall, Harvie and Langside councillor Holly Bruce, who was praised as having a 'good track record which appeals to lots of our members'. Early next month, party members will be asked to make a decision on the future of the Scottish Greens. Will they reaffirm long-time grandees or embrace fresh, working-class voices? Their decision, whatever it may be, will reverberate through the halls of Holyrood for years to come.
